Should Star Trek be less "Star Trek-y"? Simon Pegg is writing the next Star Trek movie and he was given very specific instructions from the studio. According to Slashfilm, Paramount decided to make big changes in the tone of the next film. Pegg told Radio Times, "They had a script for Star Trek that wasn' t really working for them. I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little bit too 'Star Trek-y'. [Avengers: Age of Ultron], which is a pretty nerdy, comic-book, supposedly niche thing, made $1.5 [billion] dollars. Star Trek: Into Darkness made half a billion, which is still brilliant. But it means that, according to the studio, there's still $1 billion worth of box office that don 't go and see Star Trek. And they want to know why."

According to Pegg that might mean making a western, thriller or a heist movie, then "populate that with Star Trek characters so it s more inclusive to an audience that might be a little bit reticent. "

The article points out that this is familiar to fans of the TV series who saw the characters explore many genres on the show. Both the original series and Star Trek the Next Generation played with genres like Westerns, Medieval adventures and film noire.

It's important to remember that they want to contradict the stereotypes of Star Trek as being boring and melodramatic and not necessarily take away what makes Star Trek wonderful. With fans complaining about he difference in tone of the last two movies, will they accept an even more change?

The Star Trek Into Darkness sequel (rumored Star Trek Beyond) is directed by Justin Lin and will be released July 8, 2016.

Do you have an idea for a poll? Send it to us by emailing geektwins (at) gmail.com!Should Star Trek be more like Transformers or Star Wars? What's your most and least favorite thing about Star trek? Which is your favorite Star Trek movie and why?

If you enjoyed this, then please use the buttons below to tell your
friends about this post! Follow us! Email
| RSS
| Twitter | Facebook

Related Posts

StarTrek

Post a Comment

15 comments:

If they get back to the roots of the original series and ignore the influence TNG had on everything, I'll be a happy camper. Simon Pegg's description sounds like what TOS was founded in. At any rate I trust Pegg to turn out the best script for the films to date.

I really loved the last couple of films, and honestly never really got into the earlier films and shows, though more due to lack of time than anything else. Still Star Trek does have a bit of a stigma attached to it and I know a lot of people who are unwilling to watch because of that. (Which is just silly, imho, but people have said that to my face...they obviously didn't have a clue about my movie tastes! :)

Just with regards to the Star Trek episode called "The Gamesters of Triskelion": I want to bugger Angelique Pettydebbie (as the bird was in 1961 when the bird was 18, not as the bird is now obviously, which is long since dead, unfortunately). 50 years ago that bird was quite ass-tonishing. By the way, i had to change the second syllable of her surname from a geezers name (John) to a birds name (Debbie) because of my murderous homo-phobia, i just thought i`d clarify that for all those Star Trek fans who thought i`d spelt her surname incorrectly, cheers.

Yes Meradeth, "Star Trek" does indeed have a stigma attached to it, and that is that everybody always knew that "Lost in Space" was a much better show but they weren`t prepared to admit it for some reason. Smith and the Robot ruled outer space where-as Kirk and Spock were tossers in comparison.

Norbert, i dont know about it necessarily being a better show (or that Kirk and Spock were 'tossers', whatever that means ?) but i do remember falling about laughing at the antics of Dr. Smith and the Robot (i still do to this day actually, i own every episode on DVD ! ! !), the comedy was better with Lost in Space but i still think Star Trek was better with the science and predicting the future.

with the 2009 film, the trek we know is gone... the shift in time gave the future a new face more to the warship enterprise than a peace mission. it rolled over into the second film where it wasn't about hope, it's being ready for the future that is not just capped to what we think or what is was.

I don't know how to answer the poll. Star Trek is Star Trek-y in part because of all the different kinds of stories it can tell. Some of the movies, especially the Next Generation ones, tended to tell one type of story, but there was Voyage Home (originally conceived as an Eddie Murphy project) that was obviously very different from what you'd expect. In fact, since Voyage Home already exists, it's hard to say that Star Trek doing this again would be...different. I never had a problem with the tone of the new movies. I love the new movies. Paramount should remember that they're also by far the biggest hits the film franchise has ever had. That's success that can be built on, as Justin Lin has proven in the past. So I'm not worried regardless of the creative choices that are being made.

I am happy they will make the new Star Trek movie less Star Trek Star Trek was Boring before Abrams came around and now it's great at least the first one was and now they want to make this one even less Star Trek this is great now we have Idris Elba and he is a great actor.